Cephas v. Nash’s Empirical Analysis
328 F.3d 98 · 2003
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably United States v. Parkes (2007), United States v. Bruno (2004)
21 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2248 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2265 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Chapman v. State of California · Thomas v. Arn · Pinkerton v. United States · Bailey v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here ... petitioner invokes § 2241 jurisdiction to raise claims that clearly could have been pursued earlier ... then the savings clause of § 2255 is not triggered and dismissal of the § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction is warranted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dhinsa v. Krueger“a party's failure to object to any purported error or omission in a magistrate judge's report waives further judicial review of the point”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.